The New Testament Deconstructed

The authors of the NT draw heavily on the OT for words spoken by Jesus. Is this because he went around quoting scripture? In Matthew and Mark Jesus called out at the time of his death words from Psalms 22:2 : “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” In John we see that his final words are “It is finished,” and this is the correct version. John was with Jesus as he was pushed to the Jewish leaders, to Herod, to Pilate and up to Calvary, staying there with Jesus while he suffered. We know he was there because Jesus told him to take care of his Mother, Mary. And it wasn’t just Jesus quoting scripture; it goes deeper than that. I didn’t initiate this idea; it came from somewhere else. The events Jesus is involved in are ‘mirror images’ of certain scenes in the OT. To underscore that Jesus is a prophet, his actions conform to actions of such prophets as Ezekial, Elijah, Elisha, Ezra, Zechariah. Judas Iscariot was paid 30 pieces of silver to betray Jesus, but he regretted it. He flung the silver back at the Priests who had given it to him ( in one version). In Zechariah, he is a rejected shepherd but is nontheless paid 30 pieces of silver. Zechariah flings the silver into the Temple treasury. Why do the authors of the Gospels make-up these parallels? They have enough brilliant literary techniques without these parallels. But this isn’t even an important parallel-there are more mysterious ones. A prophet, maybe Elijah, cures a widow’s son as he is being carried to his grave (he wasn’t dead). Jesus does the same thing. He also cures a widow’s son, who appeared to be dead but wasn’t ( Luke 7:11). Elijah’s miracle is in 1 Kings 17:17-24. I could give other examples but the meaning is clear enough.

Fitzgerald says there is no historical evidence for the existence of Jesus. But historical evidence is staring us in the face. I think that John’s Gospel was written by the Apostle himself around 90 AD or CE as they say now. The early Christians would have known him. He lived to an old age. So there is a path forward; there are connections that Fitzgerald can’t seem to find. John was an eyewitness to the ministry of Jesus, his crucifixion and Resurrection. Perhaps Fitzgerald doesn’t want to believe John was the John.

I would like to go back to Simon Peter and Simon Cyrene and his two sons, Alexander and Rufus. Cyrene is called to carry Jesus’ cross up to Calvary (there is no consensus on where this place is located). There is significance given by Mark to these names. Cyrene was a port city in Libya. A sect of hedonistic atheist philosophers came from there. They rejected anything spiritual and maintained that pleasure was the value worth pursuing. So they were a perfect opposing symbol for Mark’s Gospel: a complete rejection of the spiritual in favor of materialistic lusts and worldly wisdom (Fitzgerald). The Cyrene then represented two worldly values that were metaphorically crucified with Jesus.